Veith v. Patterson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““William Patterson and his employer,' John A. Veith, had accepted and were operating under the provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act. As the result of an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment, Patterson, on November 4, 1927, received injuries which resulted in his death on December 18, 1927. On the divorce of Patterson from his wife, he was awarded the custody of their child, Jennie May Patterson. On May 23, 1927, Jennie May Patterson was committed to the Kentucky State Reform School, an institution maintained by the state, and was an inmate of that institution both at the time her father was injured and at the time of his death. 'She was paroled on or about November 1, 1928, which was about a year subsequent to the accident. Her father supported her up until the time of her commitment to the reform school, but contributed nothing to her support after that time. At the time of her commitment to the reform school, and at the time of the accident to, and the death of, her father, she was under 16 years of age.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Johnson v. Kentucky Color & Chemical Co.

2. ““Upon a reconsideration of the question we see no reason to depart from that construction. To step short with the words ‘child or children under 16 years of age’ would leave out of consideration tbe parent upon whom such child or children were dependent. It is true that in the case of Fordson Coal Co. v. Burke, 219 Ky. 770 , 294 S. W. 497 , we held that the relation of dependency should be determined in the light of prior events, and should not be controlled by an unusual temporary situation, but it hardly can be said that the situation here presented is only temporary.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Franklin Fluorspar Co. v. Bell

3. ““In all other cases the relation of dependency in whole or in part shall be determined in accordance with the facts of each case existing at the time of the accident, blit no person shall be considered a dependent in any degree nnless he be living in the household of the employee - at the time of the accident, or nnless snch person bears to the employee the relation of father, mother, husband or wife, father-in-law or mother-in-law, grandfather or grandmother, child or grandchild, or brother or sister of the whole or half blood.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Franklin Fluorspar Co. v. Bell